Do you even need a preamp?

[Fyper]

Bluesman is right. If anyone clearly made that statement, it would not be true. A passive volume control can be a great analog solution that's not a preamp.

 

 

It is also called a passive preamp though...

[17629]

It is also called a passive preamp though...

 

 

Correct. But even though we sometimes call these devices passive preamps, its the wrong term. There is no such thing as a passive preamp. Its impossible. In order for a preamp to be a preamp, it has to be active, not passive.

[sandyk]

It is also called a passive preamp though...

 

Like the vast majority of passive "preamps", it would only be suitable for driving relatively short interconnects and power amplifiers with a relatively high input impedance, in order to reduce HF rolloff. Some transformer type passive "preamps" are better in this respect, but transformers also have their own little limitations.

[esldude]

Correct. But even though we sometimes call these devices passive preamps, its the wrong term. There is no such thing as a passive preamp. Its impossible. In order for a preamp to be a preamp, it has to be active, not passive.

 

Yes, they actually are simply a volume control without the amplifying circuitry of a preamp included. As SandyK says, best used with high input impedance amps and short cables.

[Blake]

Yes, they actually are simply a volume control without the amplifying circuitry of a preamp included. As SandyK says, best used with high input impedance amps and short cables.

 

+1

[17629]

Yes, they actually are simply a volume control without the amplifying circuitry of a preamp included. As SandyK says, best used with high input impedance amps and short cables.

 

Of course, you will want to keep cable runs short, but that usually isn't a problem since passives are typically much smaller than active units. In many cases, you can fit one right next to the source, or even on top of it. I find the quality of the sources output section to be a pretty big factor for SQ as well. Regardless, like I said in my first post, any setup like this needs to be tested before making a firm commitment. And that really shouldn't be too difficult, given options like dealer loaners, return policies, buying used, .... If you're willing to put the time in you can get extremely good SQ for the money. I love a good preamp, but they're expensive.

 

No only that, if you end up getting a cheap active preamp, you will pay dearly for the mistake. I'm pretty sure the OP of this thread had another one from yesterday about how he just traded his McIntosh integrated for an NAD. I can't be absolutely sure, because I haven't heard his system, but I'm willing to bet the real problem is not the amp section of the integrated, but the preamp. Happens all the time. The preamp gets overlooked, and money is spent on other things, and the problem never goes away. Now that I think about it, I'm pretty sure most NAD integrateds connect their amp and preamp sections with external jumpers. If the source has a volume control, it wouldn't be a bad idea to plug it directly into the amp section of the NAD. It could make a huge improvement without spending any money at all.

[Fyper]

Not really interested in discussing whether a passive volume control is a preamp or not, for me it is, although I'm well aware that an amplified preamp is way more sophisticated than that.

 

My point was, if one is using an analog volume control integrated in a DAC, a soundcard, an amp or anything else (all those including de facto some "amplifying circuitry"), then one is actually using a preamp, although the perception might be different.

 

As opposed to those who use exclusively some kind of digital volume control (software or hardware): they indeed don't use any preamp.

If it's lossless it perfectly acceptable to connect directly to an amp, and intellectually it's more satisfying since there is one less link in the chain.

[17629]

Not really interested in discussing whether a passive volume control is a preamp or not, for me it is, although I'm well aware that an amplified preamp is way more sophisticated than that.

 

My point was, if one is using an analog volume control integrated in a DAC, a soundcard, an amp or anything else (all those including de facto some "amplifying circuitry"), then one is actually using a preamp, although the perception might be different.

 

As opposed to those who use exclusively some kind of digital volume control (software or hardware): they indeed don't use any preamp.

If it's lossless it perfectly acceptable to connect directly to an amp, and intellectually it's more satisfying since there is one less link in the chain.

 

This is not a matter of perception, its a matter of fact. In order to have a preamp, you need to have an amp. To call a passive volume control a preamp is factually incorrect. There is no active circuitry whatsoever. And that's exactly why people buy them in the first place. They allow you to NOT use a preamp. It can't be any more clear. The term passive preamp is just used as a matter of convenience, and nothing more. Before you reply, look into the matter a bit further and get some facts. Maybe contact some companies that make passives and see what they say.

[Fyper]

My posts and interest are NOT about passive preamps, I didn't bring that subject up, I'm talking about something else. I can't be any more clear.

[17629]

My posts and interest are NOT about passive preamps, I didn't bring that subject up, I'm talking about something else. I can't be any more clear.

 

 

"Not sure if it's been clearly said by anyone, but any device including some form of analog attenuation is a preamp, whether it's a stand alone one, if it's integrated into an amp, a DAC or a soundcard."

 

What do you call, "any device including some form of analog attenuation is a preamp"? You can't have it both ways.

[sandyk]

A PreAmplifier has by definition a voltage gain of greater than UNITY (1 x)

Even an active Buffer stage has a small voltage loss, and it's output is typically a little over .9 times the original input voltage, although it provides current gain that allows it drive lower input impedances.

[Fyper]

"Not sure if it's been clearly said by anyone, but any device including some form of analog attenuation is a preamp, whether it's a stand alone one, if it's integrated into an amp, a DAC or a soundcard."

 

What do you call, "any device including some form of analog attenuation is a preamp"? You can't have it both ways.

 

For the last time, read the main points of my posts, I was referring to the analog attenuation integrated in other devices...

[17629]

For the last time, read the main points of my posts, I was referring to the analog attenuation integrated in other devices...

 

 

Then give a specific example of what you mean because it doesn’t matter where the analog volume control is. If there's active circuitry involved, its considered a preamp. No active circuitry = no preamp. Don't just keep telling me I'm wrong. Show me a product that proves your point because this is getting silly.

[bluesman]

If there's active circuitry involved, its considered a preamp. No active circuitry = no preamp.

I truly hate to inject this, as I support the point I think you're trying to emphasize. But there are passive devices with gain, and they're also preamplifiers because they increase voltage. Transformer-based passive gain stages increase the input voltage by a factor roughly equal to the turns ratio of the input and output ("primary" and "secondary") coils of wire, so they pump the microvolt signals from a moving coil cartridge up to millivolt levels to drive the next amplification stage.

 

Devices without power supplies can't increase power, i.e. the product of voltage x current. So the voltage gain can only be maintained at lower current flows (specifically at or below 1/turns ratio times the input current). But well designed and manufactured transformer-based gain stages sound excellent, inject virtually no noise, and have much lower distortion than active stages with similar voltage gain.

 

The practical limit on currently available passive audio gain stages is an output level of about 5mV, which is exactly what a moving magnet phono stage wants to see at its front door. But the same principle could be used to drive output stages directly if cost were no object - it would just take much larger transformers and careful matching of impedances across the interfaces between gain stages to boost millivolts to volts. Optimizing impedance matches throughout could even result in a net power increase (from source to speakers) over an active input stage, if the output impedance of the active input stage is a bad match for the input impedance of the next stage and more signal power is dissipated as heat instead of sound.

[musickid]

I have a modimultibit connected to my tube amp. i would like to add a meridian explorers dac via line out also to my tube amp. the meridian will do mqa and quite cheap. the idea of a preamp sys sounds like SQ compromise. is there any way at all apart from manual switching the connections rca each time? maybe this question is flawed i dont know. thanks anyhow.

[sjay]

Is there anything wrong with the thinking that one doesn't even need an integrated amp or preamp?

If my DAC has a remote volume control, and i never change my balance or bass/treble controls, is there any reason i can't just buy an amp and not worry about a preamp?

i am in a very lucky position to have an awesome volume pot in my DAC, as well as 2 world class pre-amps and have done some serious listening with all 3 combos.

 

The MSB volume pot is very good, there is no doubt about that but my Ayre and Audio Research pre's do sound better by a clear margin.

 

However being able to remove my 4 shelf rack and just use a 1 tier with DAC and AMP is a very nice combo as not having kit in the middle of the sound stage helps remove smearing the 4 shelf rack seems to induce but now that I have added a TT, I had to go back to using my 4 shelf rack to accommodate it. I still alternate between my 3 pre-amp options on a semi regular basis because I enjoy each and every one of them for different reasons. They all do certain things very well and at this level it comes down to good old personal taste.